SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 15089

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
FARJAND ALI
SMT. POOJA – Appellant
Versus
MAHENDRA SINGH – Respondent
EXFA / 6 / 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kailash Khatri
For the Respondents: None present

An executing court must exercise inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to compel judgment-debtors to execute a registered gift deed as per compromise decree to give full effect to ownership rights, not just possession.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 151 - Inherent powers of Court - Execution of compromise decree - Where decree confers ownership but only possession is delivered, Executing Court must exercise inherent powers to compel judgment-debtors to execute a registered gift deed or conveyance to perfect title - Decree cannot remain a mere paper decree; full relief must be secured. (Paras 7-15)

(B) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 96, Order XXI Rules 98, 103 - Execution First Appeal - Appeal lies against order rejecting execution application and application under Section 151 - Appellate court can set aside such order and direct proper execution. (Paras 1-2, 21-22)

Facts of the case:
The appellant decree-holder had obtained a compromise decree in a partition suit. The terms recorded that the plaintiff would get absolute ownership and possession of Shop No.3, and the defendants would assist in obtaining a separate patta and execute a gift deed to save the plaintiff from heavy stamp duty. After decree, possession was handed over but no document of title was executed. The decree-holder moved an application under Section 151 CPC before the Executing Court seeking direction to the judgment-debtors to execute a gift deed. The Executing Court dismissed the application holding that possession had been delivered and that the issue of obtaining patta from the municipality was beyond its scope. The decree-holder appealed.

Findings of Court:
The High Court held that the Executing Court fell into palpable error in denying the true fruits of the decree. Possession without title is not equivalent to ownership; proprietary rights of alienation, mortgage, or finance cannot be exercised merely on possession. Section 151 CPC preserves inherent powers to make orders necessary for ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process. The Executing Court was duty-bound to employ these powers to effectuate the decree fully, including directing execution of a registered gift deed. The judgment-debtors had voluntarily agreed to execute a gift deed to save the plaintiff from financial burden, and that undertaking must be honoured. The court accordingly quashed the impugned order and directed the Executing Court to fix a date for appearance before the Sub-Registrar, with a court officer present, to execute and register the gift deed, with all expenses borne by the judgment-debtors. The concerned municipal authority must then issue a separate patta to the decree-holder.

Issues: (1) Whether the Executing Court, after delivering possession, could refuse to direct execution of a registered document of title as per the compromise decree? (2) Whether the inherent powers under Section 151 CPC could be invoked to compel the judgment-debtors to execute a gift deed to give full effect to the decree?

Ratio Decidendi: The inherent power under Section 151 CPC is a safety valve to render complete justice where the Code is silent. The Executing Court cannot allow a decree to become a dead letter; it must ensure that the decree-holder secures the substantive benefit of ownership, not merely possession. A compromise decree unequivocally conferring title requires the judgment-debtors to execute a transfer deed. The Executing Court's abdication of responsibility by shifting the burden to the municipality was unsustainable. Result : Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; directions issued for execution of gift deed and issuance of patta.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • practice and procedure
    • civil procedure
      • appeals (Para 1, 2, 3, 21, 22, 23)
      • execution of decrees
        • compromise decree (Para 4, 5, 6, 16, 17)
        • inherent powers under section 151 cpc (Para 9, 10, 11, 14)
  • property law
    • partition (Para 4, 5)
    • transfer of property
    • registration of documents (Para 17, 18)
    • municipal patta (Para 19, 20)

Table of Contents

1. Compromise decree for partition — Executing court rejected application under Section 151 CPC to direct execution of gift deed for title transfer. (Para 4 , 5 )

2. Decree-holder sought execution of gift deed; Executing Court held decree satisfied by possession and no further relief within scope. (Para 5 , 6 )

3. Appeal allowed; order set aside; judgment-debtors directed to execute registered gift deed; municipal authority to issue patta. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 )

4. What is the scope of inherent powers under Section 151 CPC in execution proceedings?

Court can exercise inherent powers to make orders necessary for ends of justice, including directing execution of documents to give full effect to decree. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 )

5. Can a decree be considered fully executed if only possession is delivered but title documents are not executed?

No, possession without title is insufficient; decree must give full ownership rights including ability to alienate, mortgage, etc. (Para 7 , 8 )

6. What is the duty of the Executing Court when a decree contemplates execution of documents with cooperation of judgment-debtors?

Executing Court cannot abdicate responsibility; must direct execution of documents to make decree meaningful. (Para 12 , 13 )

7. How should a court ensure compliance when judgment-debtors are to execute a gift deed as part of compromise decree?

Court can fix date for appearance before Sub-Registrar, direct judgment-debtors to bear expenses, and ensure registration. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 )

8. What is the obligation of municipal authorities upon presentation of a registered gift deed pursuant to a decree?

Municipal authority must issue patta as administrative act flowing from decree, not as fresh adjudication. (Para 19 , 20 )

Order

Reportable

1. None present for the respondents, despite service.

2. The instant Civil Execution First Appeal under Section 96 read with Order XXI Rule 103 and 98 and Section 151 of the CPC giving challenge to the order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gangapur (Bhilwara) in Civil Execution Case No.3/2023 (Pooja Vs. Mahendra singh & Ors.), whereby the learned Executing Court rejected the application under Section 151 of the CPC preferred on behalf of the appellant as well as the execution petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the order under challenge and the other material as made available to this court.

4. Bereft of unnecessary details, brief facts giving rise to the instant execution first appeal would be that the appellant had filed a suit for partition of the suit property. During the course of the said proceedings, on 17.08.2022, the parties entered into a compromise. As per the terms of the compromise, the parties agreed to give shop No.3 on ground floor to the plaintiff towards her share. The defendants also agreed and consented to provide assistance to the plaintiff to obtain a separate patta of shop No.3 of the suit property in her name and the same shall be registered. The defendants had also agreed that wherever their signatures would be needed, they would remain present willingly to append their signatures. Looking to the predicament of the plaintiff, perhaps it was agreed that instead of executing a sale deed, the defendants would execute a gift deed and the same shall be get registered and probably it was done just to accommodate her so that she may get separate ownership of the property. The learned trial court, based upon the compromise and amicable settlement, decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff-appellant. She was given full liberty in respect of the shop No.3 of the ground floor of the suit property, which includes getting the property registered in her name or to obtain patta from the municipality, in which the defendants shall not object.

5. After the judgment and decree, though there was proclamation regarding ownership of the shop No.3 to the plaintiff-appellant, but in fact neither she was given possession of the property nor the documents of properietary right and title were executed. It is in this scenario, she moved an Execution Petition bearing No.3/2023 before the trial court. The learned Civil Judge after hearing the counsel for the parties passed the order dated 10.07.2023 for delivering the possession of the shop in question to the appellant decree holder as well as directed the defendants to execute a written document in favour of the plaintiff-appellant. In pursuance of the said order, on 25.07.2023, the actual possession of the shop No.3 was given to the decree holder, however, no document was executed in her favour, in absence of which, she abstained from making agreement of any kind with any person with regard to the shop to sell it, to enter in to any kind of contract to take loan or to get finance. In such circumstances, the appellant moved an application under Section 151 of the CPC praying that the judgement debtors be directed to execute a gift deed in her name with regard to the shop No.3 so that she may obtain separate title or patta from the municipality or UIT concerned. It was her assertion that doing the above would be must because the entire property remains in the name of the judgment debtors and she could not get title over the shop No.3, which is the part of the entire property and unless a separate title document is prepared in her favour, she could not enjoy rights of it. The learned trial court dismissed the application holding that it was a decree based on compromise and for which possession has been handed over to her and the judgment debtors are not creating any hindrance in use and occupation so also that the judgment debtors are not objecting for obtaining a patta from the Nagar Palika in favour

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top